Separatist Radio-Canada Smears Jean Charest

If longtime readers conclude that my least favourite group is politicians, they would be making a decision based on the many disparaging posts I write, directed at all politicians of all stripes, who I have characterized as largely self-serving, mostly incompetent and always selfishly looking after their own political interest.

But that conclusion would be faulty, because it is in fact dishonest and self-serving reporters that rankles my sensibilities far worse than politicians, who cannot always be blamed for their ineptitude because in most instances, they haven't got the smarts or skills to do their job effectively.

The Press however, and more specifically those reporters who cover the politicians, are generally smarter and better trained at their jobs than the politicians they cover (and they revel in that fact), but are generally more devious, cynical and just as dishonest.

Therein lies my utter disdain and disrespect.

Reporters are a smug, sanctimonious and self-important lot and because they have the power to build up or destroy, they develop a superior and haughty complex shared only with those occupying the benches of our courts.

And like judges they are generally impervious to attack, hiding behind cloak of confidentiality like a thirteen year-old pimply faced video game maven, using a 'Shield of Invulnerability,' picked up on level six.

It befalls editors to insure that reporters using anonymous sources do so ethically and honestly. Readers will note that the information that anonymous sources provide is almost always impossible to second source and the decision to print or air a story based on one anonymous source becomes a question of integrity, something sorely lacking in the competitive world of journalism.

A veteran editor once told me, that to a reporter, a scoop is like heroin to an addict, impossible to resist under even the most dubious circumstances.

One of the more sinister aspects to these anonymous-based stories, is when the reporter is given inside information to leak, in an underhanded manoeuvre to circulate a story (usually negative) that will give the source or his political party an advantage.
The reporter and editor must weigh whether being used by the leaker to further a political goal is less important than the public's right to know, and readers, you know where the decision will fall, clearly on the side of heroin.

The third and most ominous aspect to quoting an anonymous sources, is when a biased reporter uses the information to help or hinder a politician or political party.
While we demand that reporters act ethically and impartially, it is seldom the case.

Look at those reporters likePierre Duchesneof Radio-Canada who magically transformed himself into a PQ separatist politician soon after he gave up the supposed impartial world of reporting.

And do not think this is exclusively a Radio-Canada/ Parti Quebecois phenomenon.
Let us remember Senator Mike Duffy who jumped into his Conservative senate seat directly from his nationally televised, afternoon political interview show on CTV and Peter Kent another high profile English television news personality who went from a news anchor's chair straight into the cabinet.

These type of journalists are the ones I absolutely loathe, they feign impartiality, while subtlety influencing the stories they produce on air.

Which brings me to the hatchet job on Jean Charest unloaded last week by Radio-Canada journalist Alain Gravel.

It was a classic case of the third example I described above, of a reporter attempting to politically injure a politician, when it hurts the most, that is, during an election campaign.

Let me start with the story that Mr. Gravel and his flunky Marie-Maude Denis presented to the public.

Very briefly, it is a tale about an SQ investigation of a union leader they suspected of being corrupt.
The day after a televised report by that same Alain Gravel about alleged corruption of another union boss, the SQ decided to follow one of his colleagues, to see where he went and who he met with.
It was plain and simple a fishing expedition.
When it comes to crime detection it seems that the SQ is the last to know.

The undercover officers were following the suspect around town, when in the afternoon, he attended a political function in a hotel in Montreal where a gaggle of politicians both federal and provincial, were meeting with native leaders, including Jean Charest.
The target of the investigation was seen exchanging pleasantries with Mr Charest for between thirty seconds or two minutes (depending on who you believe) and minutes later the officer in charge of the operation terminated the surveillance abruptly.

That readers is the whole story.
Everything else that comes after is rank speculation by Mr. Gravel or the leakers, who were some of those police officers involved with the surveillance and who were peeved that the operation was called off.

In fact one of the officers speculated that the officer in charge called off the operation because he panicked seeing the subject meet
Mr. Charest.

"The
officer in charge of the operation simply panicked when he saw the
suspect meet Mr. Charest and decided to call of the surveillance."

Now look at the Radio-Canada headline about the incident.

"Surveillance of an ex-directer of the FTQ Construction called off after a meeting with Mr. Charest"

That readers, is one of the most misleading headlines I've ever read in my life!

If you didn't go on to read the story, you would likely assume that Mr. Charest had ordered the surveillance to be called off in a meeting.
Accident or design?

"The gist of the radio-Canada report on the incident intimated that there was some sort of political interference that brought the investigation to a close, an allegation that a furious Charest denied.

"Premier Jean Charest found himself in denial mode Thursday after a
Radio-Canada report suggested that he arranged for the plug to be pulled
on a police investigation of a Liberal supporter named Eddy Brandone in
2009."Link

And so readers, that is how to run a textbook smear operation!

Touché and congratulations Mr. Gravel, mission accomplished!

Perhaps UQAM should offer Mr. Gravel a guest lectureship in yellow journalism in their communications program entitled "How to destroy federalists through activist journalism."

Readers might ask themselves why these police officers waited until now, over three years after the incident occurred, to leak a story that happened in May, 2009.
Can anybody come to any conclusion other than it was to hurt Mr. Charest politically during an election campaign?

Did Mr. Gravel and his team not understand or care that they were being played or were they overjoyed to massage and distort a story to hurt the Premier during this critical period?

And by the way, the reason for halting the surveillance is easily explainable.
The officer in charge probably did panic, his unit was on a fishing expedition which paddled into some dangerous waters.
You don't spy on the Premier of Quebec without a damn good reason and one can easily see how prejudicial it would be if it got out that the SQ was watching the Premier surreptitiously.

Now Mr, Gravel should know what every one else in high places knows, that is, that the SQ isn't controlled by anyone, they are a force unto themselves.

The SQ may not be particularly competent, but it is incredibly powerful.
It is to my knowledge, the only state or provincial police force in North America that actually has veto power over which politician will be chosen by the Premier to be the Public Security Minister, the direct political minder of the SQ.

The SQ is fiercely independent and the idea that a Premier can call up the SQ boss and tell him to nix an investigation is complete and utter fantasy.

The SQ does on occasion act to protect the government or politicians, it is part of its mandate.

A couple of years ago, when the SQ became aware, through wiretaps, that the stripper daughter of the then Justice Minister Marc Bellemare was associating with alleged dope dealers, they informed the Minister in order that he head off trouble.

Was that a conflict or were they acting diligently?

Lost in all this is the fact that if we accept Mr. Gravel's intimation that Mr. Charest somehow influenced the SQ to curb a criminal investigation, then the SQ is a corrupt organization all the way down to officers controlling surveillance operations.

Oh, GD, so what you're saying is unilingual Francophones are complete morons. They're not "trapped" (LOL,L,L), they're stupid. With all the media sources - TV, radio, newspapers, social media, texting, etc., your insinuating there are zero sources in French that honestly cover the news?

If you're saying there are NO reliable French sources carrying the news, that they're all of a separatist slant, then you're stating ALL Francophones who can't understand English are separatists! Trapped like lobsters in a pot of boiling water (and where have we heard THAT simile before?) Laugh out loud, loud, loud, GD!

For Francophones who do understand English, then the English media is their saviour! That's how I read your implication. Trapped, my ass!

WE ARE YOUR BRETHREN!!!!You talk to us about Ernst Janning in the last post and then condemn us all to the gross racism here. I don't get it, probably 'cause I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are not in your Ontario Ivory Tower to save your own hide while taking pot shots at us here.

I've stated many times how the separatist factory "schools" are set up here. when you've been in the lobster pot from day one, your chances of getting out are minimal. If you look at the demographics on who votes for the racists, you see that it is more that 90% unilingual Francophones.

I think you are shellshocked at how you made a decision to leave early enough to make a life free of QuébécoisRacists and that has you wounded because you've left a large part of your soul behind. Stop trying to lock the lobster pot lid on us! We're not all racists! WE ARE YOUR COUNTRYMEN!!!!

NO, G.D., NO! The problem is my countrymen let ME down! The weapon of choice was getting the hell out of Quebec, not staying and fighting. My late mother said we should stay and fight, but when push came to shove, too few took a stand. There is something to be said for the old cliché "United we stand, divided we fall".

Bill 22 was legislated in 1974. Howard Galganov's activism took place 20 years later, and most Anglophones didn't stand behind him. Too little, too late. Hugo Shebbeare's anti-Bill 101 protests bring out a dozen people or two. Far from enough. In the 38 years between Bill 22 becoming law and today, the only truly defiant act I witnessed by the minorities took place in 1989 and came to a screeching halt in 1994--the election of four members of the Equality Party.

Yes, the English radio and TV stations had scathing commentaries about Bills 22 and 101. Yes, Sophie Walloch, founder of Montreal's largest English community paper, The Suburban, wrote scathing commentaries, referring to Bou-bou as Pinocchio (for damn good reasons), and so did the Star and Gazette as well, I suppose.

In the 38 years past though, there has been far too much complacency on the part of the minorities, thus, ergo and therefore you get the democracy you deserve. On many occasions, I have quoted former CBC/History Channel journalist Patrick Watson for it is he who I heard state those exact words on radio. He went to different stations promoting a ten-part CBC documentary almost 25 years ago called The Struggle for Democracy. This was how he described the direction Canada is taking, i.e., increasing voter apathy.

In Quebec, the result is all political parties, including the PLQ, are far more nationalist than ever, i.e., the situation is getting worse. Several government departments won't speak to you in English anymore, and this is only going to get worse with no indications of getting better. In general, the population, esp. outside Montreal and area, is getting cockier by the day as well.

In conclusion, GD, I stand by what I wrote at the top. Too much complacency by the ones who needed to take the fight to the government, but didn't. I knew when to leave, and I don't regret one iota for having done so way back in 1984. Wish I could have done it a lot sooner!

Good on you then Sauga, but it is also your country that is being stained here; partly because the RoC branded the whole province as separatist leaving the Canadians of QC with no support. At this time the RoC has been defeated by a bunch of whiners and is ready to give up to these racists a territory greater in area than France, Italy and Spain combined. You think maybe the Russians should claim the north to even things out?

Tell me GD, what has the federal government done for Quebec minorities? SWEET F**K-ALL, that's what! Money for a lame duck called Alliance Quebec? Goody goody gumdrops! Good money chasing a do-nothing organization. If Canada is being as imbrued as you claim, where the hell was the federal government? Where were the minorities? Lotsa talk, no action.

As for S.R.'s remark, I see trolls are still getting on site.

So, GD, if you think Quebec is worth fighting for, what have you done? Since you don't really identify yourself, this is your chance to lie for all you're worth.

Oh, and BTW, do you really think Quebec is going to get the whole geographic territory? The First Nations people are entitled to their big, fat cut! You don't think partition will follow from the common folk, esp. West Island Montreal? It won't be easy, it won't be peaceful! To be sure, the feds will be bumping on a log while this all happens!

There was a comment I made in your blog this past Friday regarding your opinions on Mike Duffy's (AND you forgot Pamela Wallin's) senate appointments. I wrote:

"No doubt the media can have influence on elections, usually with favours attached. Take, for instance, the CTV National News. The former news director and host of Question Period used to freely express his opinions near the end of the newscast. His name was Bruce Philips.

During the summer of 1984, Philips brutally and mercilessly expressed one scathing anti-Liberal commentary after another, night after night, week after week, all summer long. There was no doubt the population was getting absolutely fed up with Trudeau and the Liberals, so it didn't take much to jab spears into the Liberal machine, and Turner was very weak throughout the summer election campaign.

So came the few days after Labour Day, the election was held and the Liberals were shown the Ottawa River, for the Tory landslide put them there. Guess who was the new Press Secretary at the Prime Minister's Office (PMO)? None other than Bruce Philips! I'm confident there was some kind of back room deal where Philips was promised all this had his commentaries been effective. One hand washes the other!"

The Bruce Philips patronage appointment took place 28 years ago this Fall. This is absolutely nothing new. Of course, senate appointments are a far, far sweeter deal.

Right, my bad. He's only proposing that anglos vote for the CAQ where liberals are the clear winner but he won't endorse the CAQ -- go figure; the latest polls don't show any voting shift within the non-francophone population, liberals are still leading the pack with 75% of the vote yet Charest might not get elected in his own riding of Sherbrooke, a good 14 points behind the PQ candidate.

Anglo-supremacists are in a weird position by Legault's statement. On one hand, it's almost verbatim what one hears from the most extremist members on this blog and on the comment sections of the Sun news. On the other hand, Legault is the enemy, so it has to be racist coming from him.

Are they supposed to defend the "lazy Quebecers"? Are they supposed to stop criticizing Quebec for importing North Africans instead of East Asians? Is it being racist coming from Legault means that it's racist coming from themselves too? Hard questions, all...

"Anglo-supremacists?" That's a good one. You don't see anyone here calling for bans on the French language or restrictions on the other freedoms of Francophones in Quebec.

Legault was a PQ cabinet minister and his former party was responsible for stripping away some of the rights of Quebec Anglos. He also wants to eliminate English school boards. That makes him an enemy in my books.

Yannick, you are so far out to lunch on Quebec it is truly incredible. Tell us what you would do if the Anglophones of New Brunswick repealed the official language status of French and adopted verbatim Quebec's language legislation substituting English for French and vice versa.

@Durham - An Anglo-supremacist will not be insecure to the point where he feels that French ought to be banned from signs, etc... However, he is likely to argue English is dominant worldwide and in Canada while French is in decline, that Canada has never been a bilingual country but strictly an English-speaking one, that we francophones really ought to simply learn some english and stop asking for services in French, and that services in French are okay in the abstract but should only be made available in practice if not a single anglophone is inconvenienced. That way, an anglophone's accessibility to jobs is always deemed more important than a francophone's services in French. An anglo-supremacist never has a clear idea of what the goal for French services should be like - too much is always provided according to him or her.

@John Krug: It's a bit difficult for me to feel sympathy for the anglophones for losing the officially bilingual status in Quebec ; after all, the rest of the continent is theirs, and Quebec is the only jurisdiction officially French on the North American Continent. I do believe that the need to protect the French language in Canada does mean that both linguistic groups won't be strictly speaking treated exactly the same way. Just like it would be a fallacy to say that women shouldn't receive maternity leaves because that's not fair to men.

That said, I don't see why there needs to be insult added to injury: why it's not enough to require french signeage to be used but they must require the French bigger, why it's not enough to require french service but also that every business with more than 10 employees speaks french with each other even for personal conversations, etc... and it's why I fervently hope that Marois loses the election and that the CAQ wins it, the PLQ having shown itself just as willing to add said insult to injury.

Want to know what kind of pettiness they fight for? For instance, there was a bilingual sign where the French was first and the English was second in order to use the same sentence for both (French and English construct their sentences differently, so it can go either way but often they are on opposite sides of each other).

They managed to win and have the English first, except the font size had to be dramatically reduced so that an all-English message could tower above the all-French message. Victory!

What other word than "supremacist" do you find for someone so petty as to petition the province for this kind of bullshit?

That is exactly what most Francophones in Quebec support, but in reverse. And at least French still appeared on the sign in New Brunswick. In Quebec, there is hardly any English on signs at all and it was banned completely for several decades; this would probably still be the case if it weren't for the condemnation of Quebec by the United Nations and rulings against Bill 101 by the Supreme Court.

I'm tired of the lame excuse that other languages can be restricted or banned in Quebec because the French language and culture is supposedly "threatened." That's bullsh*t. There are 7 million French speakers, they comprise 80% of the population and they hold almost all of the political power.

If English is going to be suppressed in Quebec, then I am not necessarily opposed to restrictions being placed on French in other provinces. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

It seems to me that the group in New Brunswick just didn't want to have French take precedence over English on the sign. Normally I wouldn't support their actions, but there is even worse crap going on in Quebec.

What I find interesting is that you hypocritically attack so-called Anglo-supremacists but bend over backwards to defend most of the actions of Franco-supremacists in Quebec.

I hope you move to Montreal soon and find out first-hand just how insular and hostile the Quebecois can be towards outsiders.

You've just proven my point as i posted it a few days ago; that you are an expert at circular logic.

Circular logic is where one bullshit argument is proven by another bullshit argument until your original argument is proven by itself. Stupid people will actually fall for this and then a winner is you; clever people however will see through your flawed points. This is when you should tell them to check their facts and take that time to think of real case for your POV. Alternatively, just use the troll method by pretending (if necessary) that you were just trying to piss them off the whole time.

We know where you stand and you stance has damaged OurCountry greatly!!

Martineau and Lagacé are prime examples of this, especially Lagacé. If you watch "Les francs-tireurs", you'll see that these two are more interested in the sound of their own voice, and in what the interviewee has to say. It's as if they're interviewing themselves, the guest is just a decor, the backdrop.

With all the negative media towards the English, can anyone really blame francophones for having such animosity towards us. Since most of the media (including the English media) is controlled by francophones, this animosity towards us will never end.

The fear of losing the French language (to the almighty English dominance in North America) has been put in francophones minds by politicians and the media. Without their influence, most francophones wouldn't feel the same distain towards anglophones and the wouldn't feel so different from other Canadians. Instead of the media portraying the positive aspects of Canada, they spend their time complaining about the ROC and this translates into francophone hate towards Canada.

Until drastic action is taken to twart these misdirected attacks against the rest of Canada, francophones will continue to disassociate themselves from the ROC. Is it any wonder that they do not feel as proud to be Canadian than the rest of the country? How can they be proud when all the politicians and media (as well as teachers) tell them otherwise.

Within the next 20 years, the anglophone population with decrease dramatically due to older anglophones dying and no one other anglophones moving here to replace them. This will result in more closings of our schools, reducing services and the eventual demise of our community.

MikeBC: This is EXACTLY what the Quebec government wants, no matter which party is at the helm. I referred to Reed Scowen's book to an anonymous contributor if you'll just scroll down a bit. In that same book, Time to Say Goodbye, Scowen discusses how Anglophones, since the election of the PQ in 1976, have been classified and in fact, segregated. I'll paraphrase by three categories:

Category i: You have the "Anglephones de souche", i.e. English who have been in Quebec a long time (but not exactly defined how long). Such English are considered to have rights over and above newcomers, and those who may come in the future. Scowen goes on to describe this class as having been born in English in Quebec, and having the right to die in English in Quebec (but since then, an ever increasing number of government services are not being provided in English, or are making it insurmountably difficult to get the services).

Category II: Next, you have the children of "Anglephones de souche" who are born post-Bill 101 and are expected by the Quebec government to integrate and live in French. They have the right to go to English schools if their parents are willing to obtain what I refer to "black slaves of the South papers" (i.e., a government-issued Certificate of Eligibility to be educated in English). I give it the "South" alias because it's tantamount to freed Southern black people who had to carry papers from their former owners to prove they were free. Any white person at anytime could demand the freed blacks show their papers. What a disgrace in the 20th Century and beyond!

Category III: Finally, you have newcomers, immigrants and others with no prior roots in Quebec. If they're Canadian citizens from other provinces, they too can enable their children to attend English schools in Quebec, but if they're not, they must go to French schools even if they come from English speaking countries and attended English schools. The Quebec government does everything it can to drag its feet hoping the English newcomers from other provinces will get discouraged jumping through the hurdles to attend English schools. Most don't.

This master plan was conceived either before you were born or when you were a little kid. All you did was reiterate what has been going on for over 35 years! Scowen succinctly coined the phrase: "If you don't have roots, you don't have rights." Only the Category I rooted long-time English have the roots and the rights. Eventually the Category I-ers will leave and/or die, and that transitionary phase will come to an end. Fait accompli, mission accomplished!

If you'll permit me to re-visit a comment from an older thread, Editor, I was told by an Anonymous poster that the Commissioner of Official Languages Office would have information on improving my French.

I didn't believe that; but I tried it.

And I was right -- they just got back this morning and have absolutely nothing to offer.

I'm not a person with my hand out for government help; I worked my fingers off to achieve relative bilingualism (something which few Montréalers would ever understand). I'm more or less "there", and having done all that work myself, I'm now ready to say unequivocally that regardless of whose domain "Education" belongs to, the Federal Gov't absolutely has a role to play in educating people in both languages. It's better off for everyone and makes for a healthier federation/country/population.

Like the Editor, I have a lower opinion of the press than of politicians. I used to make a real effort to read the news a lot; I still try to keep abreast, but I just don't trust over half of what I read. We give the press special rights and privileges to do their job; they owe better to us, but we're clearly not getting it. I don't trust the NYTimes anymore than I do the WSJournal, or Fox anymore than MSNBC, etc.

Kind of sad that they have no ressources.. but I guess their mandate is to ensure that federal services are available in both languages, not to provide education. It is a watchdog organization after all.

I was told by an Anonymous poster that the Commissioner of Official Languages Office would have information on improving my French [...] they just got back this morning and have absolutely nothing to offer.

Here is the link from CTV montreal where the editor of the Suburban mentions that 20% non francophone minority pay 40% of Quebec taxes. Thanks for pointing me to this, I now have a source and reference point.

OK, great, you found it, and thanks for posting it. With over 300,000 people, mostly Anglophones and other minorities, having left over the last 40 years, imagine what the tax base would have been had this mass exodus not happend, not to mention the corporations that left as well.

You and I know the stupidity of it all, but Reed Scowen mentioned in his book Time to Say Goodbye how Francophones will accept a smaller pie as long as they have an increasingly bigger piece of it.

The debate on the Scottish referendum is interesting for its parallels with Quebec.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zdzlmaIaac&feature=related

It seems that a general characteristic of a nationalist is determination. Scotland's prime minister Salmond looks like he'll try anything to get what he wants, including the lowering of the voting age to 16 y.o. (the report tells you why by interviewing high school kids - amongst the young -and stupid- nationalism is perceived as "cool"). Also, since independence is polling low (40% for, 60% against), they came up with something called "Devolution-Max", which is the SNP government's preference and the population supports it at 60-40 (of course they do - with devo-max they have the cake and they eat it too). In QC, Marois mentioned lowering of the voting age to 16, and "devo-max" is the same thing as "sovereignty-association".

The view of the English on the Scottish nationalism is probably as cynical (and correct) as that of Canadians about Quebec nationalism. In a nutshell, everyone in Canada knows that Quebec wants to have a cake and eat it too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4jIbpmvOog&feature=related

The lady at 2:23 hits the nail on the head: "Do they just want to take the best bits and continue getting funding by the English Parliament as well?"

"They" the Office, perhaps... but "Canada" is swimming in resources. Federal parties prefer French and English populations to not exchange or communicate; it's the only strategy to power they've known forever (tho changing).

Might be a good idea to put more money into education, though.100%.Everything in Canada is flexible; I don't think the fancy partisan lawyers would have any real trouble earmarking provincial allotments towards bilingualization.

Anyone not questioning the PQunt‘s blatant racism now is eitherA)stupidB)trying to be funnyC)a goddamn racist themselves And don‘t even get me started on Charest‘s piss weak response to this. He kinda just said, “well we‘ve done racist stuff too, just not as racist.“ Again, the problem probably isn‘t Charest himself (an old school politician trying to hold power) but the deep seeded, rampant racism that exists in Quebec.

The PQ sounds like a crazy, screaming, fringe party yet here they lead in the polls. I will probably take my money, productivity and general sense of decency and move it to Ontario.Its so bad I am looking back at Lucien Bouchard nostalgically and at the time I didn‘t think it could get worse than him.Bravo Pauline! And bravo Quebec on the new depths you‘ve sunk to!

Speaking of which, how about this press coverage of Landry sticking it to Legaulthttp://www.ledevoir.com/politique/elections-2012/356874/selon-bernard-landry-francois-legault-est-un-arriviste-ronge-par-l-ambition

I think it's kind of refreshing and funny yet also totally juvenile (probably exactly how I would behave in politics hahaha)

Guys, none of this matters You DO NOT want to get a PQ government, even a minority one. The PLQ is not going to win. We need to bail, and get one board with the CAQ. If the PQ wins, I'm moving to the States.

You are right, it seems that PQ will win. And what's shocking, is that it's winning on a stupid and insulting program.

And to bring a bit a fun in this whole situation... what I find ironic is that Paulette declared that Harper as PM is creating the 'winning conditions' for Quebec to separate; it might be so, BUT with Harper the PM of Canada, Quebec will not separate with the current borders, which I'd call life's little irony. If it comes to Quebec seceding from Canada, well... honestly, I'd rather have Harper negotiating the terms rather than a polite, over-accommodating, politically-correct official. I am sure Harper will not give away the Northern Quebec, and the corridor to the Maritimes. And guess how the the Labrador Quebec border dispute will be settled...

Oh well... as them seppies say... Freedom has no price. Quebec will be significantly smaller... but 'free'.

S.R.: You're somewhat more interesting to read now that you can't resort to pure trolling, but I'd still love to see you write more than one line, maybe give us some actual insight into how you see things. For instance, maybe you could tell us how you think a PQ government would be beneficial for this province, with some actual arguments. I'm not being sarcastic here, I'm actually interested in understanding "the other side's" point of view.

For me, language issues aside, a PQ government means uncertainty on the separation issue (I hope you can at least admit that), which can't be good for the financial situation of this province. If I'm a multinational corporation, I'm not investing here until that's settled (unless there are resources to exploit of course). Maybe you can live with that, if it gets you closer to your goal, but personally, it worries me. Like I've posted previously, I remember the last decade with the PQ in power, and not much got done in this province.

Now I know you'll probably say this isn't the place for a debate, but if you actually believed that, why would you spend so much time reading and posting comments on here? Seems to me like it must somewhat matter to you.. So come on, why not make it worth while?

Unrelated: I find it ridiculously ironic that Pauline Marois is proposing salary increases for doctors, when she's the one who fucked up our health care system in the first place, back when she forced 33000 to take early retirements back in 1997-1998. Links:http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/216823/pauline-marois-mauvais-jugementhttp://elections.radio-canada.ca/elections/quebec2008/2008/11/16/012-PQ-marois-pas-regrets.shtml

``uncertainty on the separation issue (I hope you can at least admit that), which can't be good for the financial situation of this province. If I'm a multinational corporation, I'm not investing here until that's settled (unless there are resources to exploit of course).``

S.R. doesn`t give a flying f*** about the financial situation. Think of him as a walking zombie, arms swinging, muttering French, French, Fennnnnnnnnnnnch......no thinking involved here, just a one track selfish mind.

``I remember the last decade with the PQ in power, and not much got done in this province``

S.R. Does not remember this time, as I am convinced that he cannot possible be more than 19 years old.

FROM ED BROWNBefore we get all panicky and start packing bags, remember the most important part of the election is yet to come. After the debates, things may change greatly. Charest probably has a few things he's not telling the press but he will hit Marois with them on TV. There's no way she can debate him in French or English. He will make her look like more of a fool than she has already done to herself. Also, before we start running to the CAQ let's see what Mr.Legault has to offer. Whatever he says in the debates he'll be stuck with and Charest will ram it down his throat for the rest of the election.Duscheneau already has dirtied himself by making comments about Charest that are the total opposite of what he said when they were working together in the corruption thing. You can bet Charest will bring that out in the public debates.One other thing, we should keep in mind that the people who left Quebec during the exodus were not fleeing French, they were moving to keep their jobs. It was the companies that left.

in my opinion, Charest's only chance is to take back votes from CAQ. I believe the 34% that would give PQ a majority are their regular base and I don't see them moving away from PQ. If they would still vote for PQ, with the amount of garbage la madame has been expelling, I don't think Charest has anything to say to change their opinions. So unless the Liberals take back at least 6-7% from Legault, I don't see how we can avoid an economic and social disaster.

Why the sigh of relief *IF* Charest gets back into power? He'll still run wild with his anti-English policies, and as for corruption, we'd be giving him a thumbs up, that we're all good with it! All that this would mean is the corrupt will increase, language crap increase and the province will continue to slowly fail and crumble. All while that arrogant sonofabitch Charest sits there with a smug smile on his face, laughing at how stupid we are.

Get rid of him! OUT! Charest and his Liberals have out lived their welcome years ago, the time for change is now.

relief because I don't see Legault gaining enough votes to form a government and for me PQ, QS or ON are not an option. Who knows, though, maybe CAQ will take away votes left and right and it will become the next government.

Well at the moment from the Anglo and Allo perspective, this is still better then the present situation. It states that the Eastern Quebec would not get transfer payments. Also the areas where the allos and anglos live for the most part would be better off. I mean I would rather Quebec Allos and Anglos can live in a pre 1974 linguistic freedom. Short of that something like Bill 22 like state is still way better then the current bill 101 state.

All I can say, is that the PQ will not get in as the next provincial government...Wait as you will see POPO "stumbling into a pitt" in the upcoming debate...I can assure you that a lot of votes will drift away towards other parties, thus making her crash into a Brick wall so heavily....So, if the Majority of Quebecers are smart and wise enough, they will not vote for that "Adolfine Mao" that will lead this province to the scrap yard...

Must drink, eat, think, read, shit, piss, and fuck in french. The Parti Raciste are like a rapist who pats themselves on the back cause he got to bang the girl. There is no pride in forcing people to speak your language.

Silly Racist (S.R) - Your "language" is about as important as what tie you wear, or the color of your shirt. Telling us you need to protect a language, anymore than your tie, is ridiculous.

It is a form of communication, nothing more. Morse code, the telephone, the Internet, also forms of communication, intimate objects that do not need protection. Of course I could go around telling people that my tie is threatened and in danger, and in order to protect it burn crosses on their front lawn of people who don't wear ties (or different patterned ones). But that's what you do, hide behind excuses, because you're a coward. A piss in your pants coward.

Bottomline, you're a transparent idiot, as are the rest of your separatist friends. You are not for a minute worried about your language and it needing protection. YOU ARE WORRIED ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE DIFFERENT, AND YOUR NEED TO PROTECT YOUR SUPREMACY OVER THEM. You couldn't give a crap about language, it's just you believe other people are lesser than YOU.

You and all the Quebecois belong in Rwanda, they speak FRENCH there and they're just you're type, a bunch of French racists who committed genocide.

FROM ED BROWNRight on Anglo A. Tell it like it is. This guy makes less sense than Swahili rap music.He tells the same thing over and over because it is the only thing he knows. I wouldn't waste time debating him he would still be totally useless afterwards. I'm hoping they will bring out that crap in the debates, even the French don't want separation. Ed

FROM ED BROWNPersonally, I don't bother reading a post anymore if it is in French. I know it wil be bullshit from one of the trolls so why take time to read it. I don't bother. As for the e,ection I will make up my mind after I hear what they say in the debates. Ed